[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?
michael.smith.erdc at gmail.com
Sun Oct 18 05:08:00 PDT 2015
I very much like the idea of paying SAC administrators for all the great
work they do. And setting up an OSGeo git infrastructure (git+trac,
gitlab, or ???) is right in line with our mission statement of our
I'm enjoying where this discussion is going. I don't think we have settled
on a consensus yet but the conversion is very enlightening.
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasurer at osgeo.org
From: Discuss <discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Sandro
Santilli <strk at keybit.net>
Date: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 6:18 AM
To: Andreas Hocevar <andreas.hocevar at gmail.com>
Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?
Resent-From: Michael Smith <michael.smith at usace.army.mil>
>On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 09:07:52AM +0200, Andreas Hocevar wrote:
>> please keep an alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for
>> projects that want to use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out
>> volunteers who have to keep OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running.
>> BlockedBlockedhttps://github.com/locationtechBlocked as an example.
>Please keep another alternative in mind: pay OSGeo system administrators.
>Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep
>OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running.
>Even if I understand that the cost for OSGeo sysadmins might be higher
>than the cost for a GitHub account, I can also see that the money
>spent on SAC might result in indirect benefit for free software tools
>(I'm sure SAC people do file tickets for the tools they use) while
>those spent on GitHub could only result in benefit for the proprietary
>software used to run that service.
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
More information about the Discuss